The Dude got his business surgically de-activated a couple of years ago, so that ship has sailed for us, but a bet a lot of you might yet have occasion to know a fella who’s on the Pill. No, not that pill. The Pill for Dudes.

What Pill for Dudes, PhDork?

Why, the one being developed by Israeli scientists that would render a man’s sperm incapable of delivering all it’s teeny-weeny chromosomes to a woman’s egg for three months at a time!

According to the Telegraph story, this truly stunning (to me) medical advancement promises to be 100% effective and without any side effects. (Is that possible?) All the testing thus far has been on rodents, but human trials are on the calendar for next year, meaning the Pill for Men could be available (by Rx? OTC?) in as little as three years.

We’ve had our Pill for 50 years (and maude bless it), and I’ve always heard that a chemical/oral contraceptive for men would never happen because 1) dudes would never voluntarily render themselves sterile, due to weird masculine identity issues; 2) men make so many sperm that “disabling” them all would be impossible; 3) guys couldn’t or wouldn’t reliably dose themselves, since the threat of an unwanted pregnancy is so much less real to them; and 4) men would never put up with the assumed side effects.

But here we (almost) are. I’m really kind of shocked, and boggling at what this might mean–for relationships between men and women, for the reproductive rights movement, for the MRAs, for the discussion around STDs, and maybe even for the future of birth control for women. I realize it’s not just a matter of “monkey with the egg!” since those babies come pre-packaged, but if there would be advancements that would rely on manipulating proteins rather than hormone levels…

For our readers with manpanions: would your dude be willing to take a contraceptive pill? Would you trust him to do so? And for those who sleep with guys: is this a good idea? (or a great idea?) How do you think this drug could change men’s sexual behavior? And how might it change yours?

My manpanion would definitely take such a pill, and I would definitely trust him to do so…but I might still want to be on hormonal BC as well (can’t be too careful!). I’m not sure this would change women’s sexual behavior that much. More that, if this is successful, I anticipate an end to MRA whining about not having a “male abortion” or women “trapping them” with babies because they just couldn’t bear to use condoms. Or, at least, if the whining continues, I anticipate a great, great counterargument.

Personally, I wouldn’t ask my dude to take it – I’m happy with my current method, and I don’t trust the “no side effects”. We’re also pretty close to having kids, so I would be leery of an impact on fertility. Maybe in ten years, after we’ve had kids and the side effect a little better known, we’d consider it.

I think that my current boyfriend would do it because he has now witnessed 1.5 years of me going through various hormonal methods. I think it’s finally settled out with an IUD, but damn, it’s been rough. If there were something that didn’t have noticeable side effects (???!!!) for him, I think he’d do it for my sake.

Maybe I’m just a suspicious, paranoid bitch, but there’s no way I would entrust my uterus to anyone but me. So while I think this pill for men is good news for those who want it, I would still use my own or get an IUD (I am lucky in that hormonal BC has never given me any trouble).

Frankly, it always amazes me when men hear the words “oh, don’t worry, I won’t get pregnant” and then go on to have unprotected sex (particularly with women they don’t know very well). I know of more than one kid running around today whose daddy should not have been so trusting. I suspect a lot of men simply don’t see preventing pregnancy as their ultimate responsibility in the way women do.

I got pregnant when I was twenty, my boyfriend at the time told me he had had a vasectomy. The needless pain and angst and expense of fixing the situation caused by that careless lie makes it difficult for me to cede the responsibility of contraception and also to put faith in invisible methods of contraception.

But those are my own issues and I think that overall more options are better for everyone.

Considering all the trouble The Boyfriend and I have been through just to start having a somewhat-normal sex life (circumcision and subsequent condom issues on his part, and for my part I still have to get a dilator set to take care of my vaginismus, so we’re not quite there yet!) I think he’d be quite happy to take a pill. I really haven’t had any real problems with mine—and after several months of occasionally forgetting and having irregular periods (thankfully this was before I became sexually active!), I’ve finally nailed the discipline of it by keeping my pills right next to my laptop—so I’d definitely be a good advocate for the XX version, therefore I don’t see anything really wrong with the XY version.

I’m with you, Becks. Unless I was in a long-term relationship of several years with absolutely zero trust issues, I wouldn’t be relying on any dude to keep my uterus untenanted. Maybe we’d even have to be married, in order to tie up the finances, too. The fact is that pregnancy just *is* much more of a problem for the pregnant woman, and men don’t have as much incentive to make sure it doesn’t happen.

And to echo Newt and others, I don’t believe there are no side effects with this pill. I wouldn’t ask my husband to take it now, for the same reason that I don’t take HBC anymore: becuase I don’t like messing up my body with hormones.

However, I am very, very grateful that scientific progress has added one more method to the list of ways we can control our reproductive freedom.

Until I married MrBard, I never would have trusted a man to take a pill. I always took care of my own form of birth control AND had my male partners wear condoms.

However, I’ve known MrBard for 10 years, and he is completely reliable. I would absolutely trust him to take a pill, and he would happily do it. In fact, he keeps talking/asking about getting snipped himself so I don’t have to be the one doing birth control.

The reason I’m not down with him having a vasectomy is that I would like another child. He doesn’t, which is why he’d like to know we’re done, now, after two. But I’m not ready to give up the option, yet.

But in the general public, I think this could be a boon to people in trusting relationships. As a woman, I would generally still prefer to keep control, thank you, but the option not to is FABULOUS!

Won’t this make impressionable teenaged boys more promiscuous and susceptible to naughty female wiles?

And without threat of pregnancy women everywhere could just use men up for sex without benefit of a relationship. Think of their delicate egos!

All I know is I don’t want to pay for it with MY tax money though Obamacare. We ought to get a lobbying group together now so we, as women, aren’t forced to pay for this elective medication that only men will use.

But maybe before giving them a prescription (because OTC availability may take 50 years at least), we could make them have to see a doctor to go through an uncomfortable physical exam, look at pictures of cute little babies and see videos of deproteinized sperm lurching around (just to make sure they know what they’re getting their sperm into).

As someone else mentioned, I would worry that this might make STI transmission more common. I can envision doodz being all “Don’t worry, baby, I take the pill. And I just got tested, I promise, so put the condoms away.” Which isn’t safe for anyone.
But, yes, a great leap forward, and I hope we’ll hear more about it.

Even if it were true that the male pill had no side effects (the Titanic was unsinkable too), I’m not sure that my husband would take it. He’s perfectly willing to use condoms but he won’t even consider a vasectomy. On one level I can’t blame him; on another level I find it irritating given my issues. Then again, maybe I’m being too pessimistic. Perhaps, he’d be more willing to do something that wasn’t permanent.

Even if he would take it, I wouldn’t stop taking the pill. It doesn’t hurt to use mulitple forms of birth control. On top of that, when it works, I like only having four periods a year.

I began dating my husband after he left a relationship with another woman who had mental health and substance abuse issues. She didn’t want the relationship to end and three weeks into he and I getting together, she told him she was pregnant with his child. What followed was a horrible year where she kept trying to get him to leave me. He finally told her that if she was pregnant with his child and a DNA test confirmed that, he was planning on taking custody and he and I would raise the child. After she gave birth, CPS became involved because she tested positive for narcotics at the birth. The court ordered (and payed for) the paternity test and it came back that he was not the father of the child. This was after he and I both had already started jumping through hoops with CPS to complete their services (multiple UA’s even though neither of us had any drug history, parenting classes, a homestudy, background checks, investigations, etc).

I know without a doubt that he wishes he had had more reliable forms of birth control for men before we went through all of that. And I would trust him completely if he had and took the male pill. However, there was one other abusive (rapist, douchenozzle) boyfriend who I would have never trusted with it even if I saw him take it everyday so I understand others hesitation.

My husband and I are partners in everything. That is what we continually strive for, and you betcha if the patriarchy has a pill it’s gonna be cheaper and more accessible, so yes and yes. He’s been wishing for a man pill since he started doing it with the ladies, really. And side effects? Heck- I’ve been dealing with those since I was 17. It would be nice to share. And really, we don’t even know the long term effects of the chemicals in plastic drinking cups, so I figure we’re all screwed already.

xenu01: first of all, congrats on your success with the Hollywood set. Second: Yeah, we’re all gonna die of something. At least you won’t leave any orphans behind…

Jenna: That sounds just horrible. I’m glad you were able to get away from the crazy, though. And yeah, really, I think that this pill will be like everything else: good guys will use it for the right reasons, and bad guys for the wrong ones.

Ideologically I like the idea of everyone sharing in the contraception.

Even if my manpanion was taking the pill, I would still take the BCP, and insist on condoms.
My health, including my sexual health, is too important to rely on a non-health care providers word about their contraceptive status. Besides, STI prevention is an important part of contraceptive methods, and it seems isn’t “covered” by the male version of the pill.

Like everyone else, I wouldn’t have trusted a guy who said he was on the pill in my casual sex/casual relationship days. But I agree with Becky that those guys shouldn’t have trusted me to say I was on the pill either.

My husband and I are a month away from having an IUD and a vasectomy between us, but in our pre-kid days, he would have jumped on the chance to take a pill that might have fewer side effects than mine did.

Also, the moment I read this news this morning, I started deciding at what age I should start my son (currently 3) on the pill. Because I don’t want teen parenthood for him anymore than I want if for my daughter. Fifteen, maybe?

@avogadro – I would say, fifteen is just a shade too old. Some kids are active pretty early. Yes, you will teach your son to be careful and choosy and all of that – but, you are talking about a child, who ultimately makes childish decisions.

I gave my son rubbers the first time he went off to sleep away camp, the summer he turned 14, between 7th & 8th grade. I am SURE that it was early, given the way my son is. But why take chances? Sleep away camp seems like a good place to get laid.

I’m a straight guy and I’m all about this. I’m young, don’t want kids, but might some day and the thought of having surgery to fix that _now_ is ridiculous. Give me a pill!!! I guess that’s all assuming the side effects aren’t horrible, but that’s a given, imo.

I think that if this drug were to become available, “The Pill” seems like the most logical name. I mean, your doctor and pharmacist know the chemical name, so what’s the problem with giving it the same “street” name as the other pill that does in principle the same thing. I would certainly take this pill (not sure why your question at the end doesn’t even take male readers into account, especially when the questions mostly aim at male attitudes and behaviors, but I’m one of them) to lessen the burden of the other pill from my significant other, especially if it is “100% effective and no side effects”, although that sounds impossible.
I am especially weary of such claims because as far as I know, the female contraceptive pill hasn’t changed much at all in effectiveness, safety, or side effects (plz correct me if I’m wrong) in the past 50 years, except that you can go longer without periods because they put more pills in the package. a lack of progress in this medication (if that’s the case) is quite disgraceful.
I also think the concept of emasculation is quite silly, and would only be a problem for those men who have deeper issues and/or poor understandings of manliness (like the word “emasculate” in the first place, which equates male genitalia with strength and manliness). but that’s a whole other topic. i can say it’s “silly” all day but what matters is that I think many men, even if those without very progressive ideas of sexuality, would still use these because it is one way in addition to condoms they can be responsible for their own side. in a casual encounter, if both people are on the pill, then a baby seems virtually impossible.
I agree though that one downside is that it would be one more of the myriad excuses men use to not use condoms in casual sexual encounters, but that’s a poor excuse for disliking the product.

@T: I am especially weary of such claims because as far as I know, the female contraceptive pill hasn’t changed much at all in effectiveness, safety, or side effects (plz correct me if I’m wrong) in the past 50 years, except that you can go longer without periods because they put more pills in the package.

Where have you been getting your information about birth control pills, my friend?

The Pill has been constantly retested and reformulated in the last 50 years. Early versions of BCP (especially Enovid) were so high in hormones that the doses had to be lowered because of reports blood clots, strokes and heart attacks in users. The formulation of the BCP has changed quite a bit since then 1950s, as have the number of different hormone combinations used to prevent pregnancy. There are now more than 50 brands on the market with different dosages, including some made without estrogen—they all work in essentially the same way, but the side effects vary from brand to brand and woman to woman.

The reason that certain brands of the pill allow women to go longer without periods has NOTHING at all to do with the number of pills in the package. To make a long story short, the traditional version of the pill has three weeks of hormones and one week of placebo pills without hormones (which a lot of us just throw out without even bothering to take them). During that placebo week, the hormone levels drop, which causes “withdrawal bleeding”, i.e. a period. The brands that let women go for months without ovulating simply don’t include those placebos. You can get the same effect by simply not taking the placebos in a regular pack and starting a new pack with no break for withdrawal bleeding. Again, it has nothing to do with the number of the pills in the pack—just whether or not they have hormones in them.

Hopefully if a pill were to come on the market for men, men would educate themselves about how it works. I think a lot of men, like you, are well-meaning, but don’t really know much about how BCP works for women.

Thank you for your response. I’m glad to hear that there actually has been such an improvement in the pill. I of course realize there are many brands and different dosages but I do know that there are still many negative side-effects that you’d assume 50 years of science would clear up. Maybe those negative effects (like a higher chance of blood clots which can be deadly) are just unavoidable.

It is true that I’m not an expert on the pill but I do know enough to know how the basics work. When I said “more pills in the pack” I was referring to the actual medicine, the pills with the regular amount of hormone, not the placebo pills. I realize that point wasn’t super clear because of my tone. My point there was that having less periods isn’t quite the breakthrough modern commercials (like those girls in colorful bathing suits jumping into hot tubs) make it seem, since it’s always been possible to take the hormone pills without stopping regularly, and so the “just putting more in the pack” comment was meant to suggest that this wasn’t that much of a breakthrough medically as it was in marketing by packaging four weeks of hormone pills in one one month box instead of the standard three and one week of sugar pills.

But again, thank you though for your analysis of the improvement of the pill over the years; it’s a fairly subjective matter and hard to judge and I’m glad to get feedback on how much it has actually improved.